national

Kyushu Electric to halt 2 reactors due to delay in anti-terrorism step

9 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

9 Comments
Login to comment

Where are the measures to introduce solar panels on office buildings?

Kyushu has almost unlimited potential for geothermal energy-Why isn’t it being exploited?

Mitsubishi has already developed tidal power generation-why is it not being utilized?

Costs of 8 billion yen a month will be passed to the end user.

What a complete ripoff is the energy business in Japan!

3 ( +5 / -2 )

kurisupisuToday  06:56 am JST

Where are the measures to introduce solar panels on office buildings?

Because it is NOT profitable for shareholders and top executives.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The energy business is for profit — not for the public good.

TEPCO offers salaries much higher than even top-tier companies, and enjoys a monopoly. Kyushu Electric is no different. Retirement packages are multiples of ordinary companies.

The ¥8 billion is inflated 10x reality, assumes a premium on everything bought, and more than likely to include executive bonuses and other perks. Nuclear energy is an easy out for power generators, and after the not guilty vote in Tokyo last month, a safe one for them.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@ kurisupisu Where are... Why...?

There are many more texts by scientists who now what there are talking about but here's the gist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciStnd9Y2ak

0 ( +0 / -0 )

On a roadtrip (you know, no destination, no maps) I came across the Sendai Plant and drove around a bit to check it out. Within seconds, I was shadowed by a police car.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Since1981, yes you are right, though the “profits” are illusory as the real long term cost of the current version of nuclear power is borne by the public purse (in every country not just Japan). If the company had to bear the cost of decommissioning and long term storage and safe disposal, even at the current inflated prices they would go bankrupt. If they had to compete in an open and unsubsidised market they would never get built.

If you want to decarbonise your electricity supply then nuclear does have a place, but not the intrinsically unsafe antiquated 1950/60’s technology currently being used and built which was primarily designed to produce weapons grade materials for bomb making. The alternative tech, known at the time, was ignored or had its budgets cut so we are only now starting to re look at them.

The other problem with current reactors is they are inefficient, they only burn about 5% of the fuel leaving a very high and long half life residue (if 95% can be called a residue) for untold generations to come to deal with.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Since1981, yes you are right, though the “profits” are illusory as the real long term cost of the current version of nuclear power is borne by the public purse (in every country not just Japan). If the company had to bear the cost of decommissioning and long term storage and safe disposal, even at the current inflated prices they would go bankrupt.

What you point out is true of just about everything - from plastic bottles and straws to solar panels. The costs of disposal, or environmental recovery in some cases, is simply passed on to the public. It should be priced in at sale, and reverse logistics that address the disposal and handling after use should be mapped out. It's one of the few places where I think regulation can help - if the people who made the regulation weren't mostly crooked.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites